June 16th, 2010: Postnationalism, Apprehending Transnationalism

1. Summary:

The Postnationalism article is about the decrease in the nation-state perspective in the cultural space due to globalization. Bamyeh argues that the two main differences in nationalism and postnationalism are that you cannot discuss or think with a nationalistic state of mind without judging it with a set of morals and the single character of nationalism cannot compete with the more globally focused and spirited groups (outside of the nation). Bamyeh goes on to write that nationalism has been an extremely costly perspective and extremely destructive, by citing examples of ethnic cleansing, such as the holocaust. Bamyeh then goes on to discuss the European and American approach to postnationalism and the three common features of postnational culture.

The Apprehending Transnationalism article starts out discussing the free market and the sharing of culture and products (like iron ore) in the world trade market. The author then goes on to compare the American film industry with other country’s film cultures. It is obvious to state that Hollywood does and has controlled the film market for quite some time, but the author goes on to explain why this is. A critical point of confusion usually happens when people criticize and oppose the American film industry, when they really oppose the capitalist culture of the industry in general (and since the American film industry is the leader in the market – it becomes the “ruler” or scapegoat for criticism).

2. What I learned/found interesting:

In the Apprehending Transnationalism article, the author states that “… critics appear oddly superior to the consumer, who is a duped, passive object in a cultural industry that allows no variation, although somehow the critic can see their way out of this process, while the rest of the world can seriously debate which is better, Coke or Pepsi” (p. 17 – 18). I think this is a really good quote and a strong point brought up by the author.

3. Discussion Point:

Why is it that allows critics to appear superior to the consumer – yet they are consumers themselves? Is it the specialization in a field of pop culture? Could it be argued that a specialization in a field of pop culture is inferior to a more education driven degree such as teaching? I am not trying to say that one field is better than another but I do know that I have witnessed people meeting new people that study theater and they are scoffed at for their major.